I think that most people who are left wondering seem to be agreeing that
this needs to be addressed by looking at the process and rules.  As far as
application, the committee did almost exactly what people expected them to
do which means that they were true to the process.  The process as a whole
was known by all and something they have to live with this year (to
paraphrase Walt Kyle).

I don't recall a season in recent memory without these sorts of questions.
Mike Schafer is unhappy, and I understand that.  However, his team is still
opening up with a team that would not have made the 12 team field under last
year's rules.  If Cornell is a championship caliber club, they need to
simply take care of business and raise their issue in time to have it looked
at for next season.

Cornell getting Mankato is definitely a tougher draw than getting Wayne
State to be sure, and to some degree the "no same conference rule" in this
case seems to add additional weight to a pre-existing criterion.
Specifically, the RPI ends up creating more bids for stronger conferences.
By disallowing same-conference first round match-ups the rules seem to make
that criterion stronger in this specific instance.  But then, the
same-conference rule was serving another end (truly nationalizing the
tourney and making it more fun) and in fact, by its nature works against a
goal of 100% seeding equity.  I highly doubt that Colorado College would be
equally as upset if they were getting Dartmouth in place of Wayne State.
Yes, MSU has a dazzling second half record, but they are also the same team
that tied AIC at home this season.

Seeding questions or not, this year's brackets are much more interesting for
the fans than last season's east/west brackets and should create a fun
tournament to follow.